About your Search

20121101
20121130
Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11
's how my friend from nevada repeatedly described it when republicans considered doing something similar several years ago but wisely chose not to. at the end of the following year my friend has -- was poised to become senate majority leader. this was back in 2006. with the experience of having served in the minority in his mind, the majority leader, the soon-to-be majority leader, the senator from nevada, made a commitment to practice the golden rule, as he put it, by running the senate with respect for the rules and for the minority rights the rules protect. unfortunately, he appears to have repudiated that clear commitment. unfortunately, he no longer recognizes, as senator byrd did, by the way, that the senate was not established to be efficient but to make sure minorities are protected. then my friend recognized that is what the senate is all about. that's what he said back then. now he says the primary consideration is -- quote -- "efficiency." he seeks to minimize concerns about this majoritarian power grab by characterizing the effect as tiny, a minor change, as changing the rule
? does he think nevada to send senator heller to the senate shouldn't be heard? does he believe on the day he finds himself in the minority once again that he should no longer be heard? does he think democrats will remain in the majority from now until the end of time? for the past several years many of us on the republicans' side of great loud objections to the diminished rights of the minority to participate in the legislative process around here. democratic leaders have tried in more ways than one to silence those they disagree with. they have blocked members including our committee chairman from expressing themselves that committee through unprecedented use of senate rules 14 which allows them to bypass committees altogether and they blocked members from expressing themselves on the floor through unprecedented use of filling the amendment tree which prevents the senate from considering amendments the majority leader doesn't like. no amendments in committee, no amendments on the floor. the majority leader made this clear to john mccain in a remarkable moment of candor when he
, but it think it will be tough to overcome the top of the ticket impact. >> stay out west in nevada, third congressional district. >> joe heck, the congressman, this is the type of district the democrats should be challenging in if they wanted to win the majority. this is suburban las vegas clark county district come place where democrats should be doing very well. and write the democrats are having a tough time going after joe heck. democratic nominee is john, a former leader in the statehouse, but what's interesting is even though he has the influential position in the state legislature from its after talking talking about his record as a firefighter. they're not even mentioning that he's a politician because that label is not one to want to have. answer right now joe heck has the advantage that if democrats are having a better night than we expect, they would need to do better in this type of district's. california is a solid blue state for the president. but a couple of interesting house races in that state. >> well, california normally as handicappers we can almost ignore the state ev
moved to nevada off of be in play list of the leading democratic list as it became clear to the polls and eventually from the early voting statistics that president obama was giving of a pretty strong lead in that state. >> so as the map comes together, what date does the "los angeles times" used to determine? >> we use a mixture of things early in the process. you are mostly relaunching on the public polls as the process goes a long to other things factor into it and one is the reporting that our political staff does. we've had reporters in all of the battleground states as it goes along. we get a lot of information from our reporters and as one's early voting get started, we've been and it's particularly important in nevada i was also important in north carolina we had moved north carolina off of our battleground list because it seemed like the public opinion polls were suggesting that the republicans had a fairly strong lead that it wants the early vote came in, they were very similar to 2008 in which president obama very narrowly won the state. so, we move to north carolina backin
rubio is leading this fight and we have governor martinez and mexico and the governor in nevada. these are people better leaders in the party right now. so they can act with what our beliefs are. they generally connect with what our beliefs on this issue of immigration in the last eight to ten years has become for third real politics in the country where you don't want to talk about it. when mitt romney was asked about immigration, it was like a very awkward he talks about immigration and that is what our party needs to talk about. >> just a couple ground rules we ask that you wait for a microphone to come around and that you state your question in the form of a question. as we have a question right here and then we will go over here. >> there seems to be disagreement on the panel about whether there will be the way to go forward or not and from the assimilation view this is a good way to work they can come in legally and we can take some strain of the black market entry and provide businesses with what they need. it seems like most immigrants throughout the history of the unite
lengthy discussions with the democratic leader harry reid of nevada, as well as former majority leader and my good friend george mitchell of maine on this very question. i came away from these conversations reassured that my independence would be respected, and that no party line commitment would be required or expected. and so i have decided to fill eight myself with the democratic caucus because doing so will allow me to take independent positions on issues as they arise and at the same time will allow me to be an effective representative of the people of maine. one final word. by associating myself with one side i am not in automatic opposition to the other. i'd like to repeat that. by associating myself with one side i am not in automatic opposition to the other. in the situation of a republican house, a democratic senate but with substantial powers residing in the minority and a democratic president, no one party can control the outcome of our collective deliberations. as bill clinton might say, it's just arithmetic. in fact, this situation of a divided government has only two pos
running around? as i recall, the nevada event that romney hit import into the rushing off after libya was a fundraiser. a fourth of his time in office is this election year and a spinning it at fundraisers. and romney is getting videotaped at his fundraisers talking about the 47% in a private, closed room with people, that's what they want to hear and that's who he is meeting with all the time. so this is a problem for i think both sides, and we're going to see that pressure, the money pressure in the house and senate races. >> we'll have a minute left but i would love to hear if there is action of some sort taken to compel disclosure or to higher degree of independence or whatever steps, measures you face. conjure a vision of the future two, three, four cycles down the road what our politics is going to look like. you were describing a minute ago the growth of a new party structure that would be composed of these sorts of organizations, the old structure which is withering away, maybe completely. what do you think, bill? what you think running a campaign would be like? >> i think cro
and should be a good one to watch is nevada. yet another presidential battle ground state. i think at this point, people think obama has a little of an edge there, but the republican, dean heller, has shown ability to get democratic voters, and people think he'll run ahead of mitt romney likely in the state so that's a state where, you know, ticket splitters could actually make a difference in the senate race, and that's been just an incredibly close senate race as well. >> anything that would surprise you coming out of election night? >> i think at this point, although people thought republicans would gain the senate, at this point, i think republicans actually picking up the four seats they need to gain senate control would surprise me. you know, this just had a few different things work against them. obviously, there's been flawed candidates, todd akin in missouri, and richard murdoch, races they were expected to win, and now they both look likely, or especially missouri, looks more likely as a democrat pickup, and so, yeah, basically, just i think it looks more likely that the
've got governor martinez in new mexico. we've got brian sandoval, governor in nevada. these are people who are leaders in our party right now, right now. so they connect with what our beliefs are. they generally connect what our police are but this issue of immigration i believe in the last eight to 10 years has become third world politics in our party. where you don't want to talk about it. when mitt romney got into debates about immigration it was like very awkward but he's like what i do with my hands, you know? we've got to talk about. that's what marco rubio leads the charge of every time he talks about anything he talks to immigration, and that is what our party needs to talk about. it's an issue we can't avoid. >> we're going to go to the audience here. just a couple ground close to ask that you wait for a microphone to come around. and that you state your question in the form of a question. so we have a question right here and then we'll go there next. >> hi. outlooks from the cato institute. there seems to be some disagreement on the panel about whether guestworker visas are g
of this sparsely populated state of nevada and do the other issues i want to defend. but, mr. president, we believe that there should be one aspect of the senate that changes, and that is this motion to proceed should be a nondebatable motion to proceed. simple as that. and the american people agree. i repeat, the only ones who disagree, that think this senate is working well are the republican leader and those republicans in congress. mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: the republican leader. mr. mcconnell: i hope the majority leader will stay on the floor here. i gather the way the majority leader proposes to effectuate this rules change is to violate the surpbt rule of the senate. -- the current rule of the senate. to do it with a simple majority. mr. reid: of course. that statement is untrue and i don't accept that. mr. mcconnell: mr. president, i believe i have the floor. that's the point. what the majority leader is saying is he will break the rules of the senate in order to change the rules of the senate. it has been the case in the past that it took a supermajority of 67, w
. >> callerare you there? we will try paul and boulder city nevada back your democrats line. paul, hello? >> caller: thank you for c-span. watching the president's comments, he's not going to take a hardline on whether the attacks which are going to go back to the clinton era. i don't understand why this president is not, i mean, as before, i hope we're not seeing a repeat, you know, the progressives and liberals really push him over the line along with labor. you know, he's got to take a stronger stance because the republicans, mitch mcconnell and cantor and boehner, they are not, you know, really acknowledging that the people have sent the message to them. that they want this president agenda, and they want them to work together. they are not acknowledging that. okay, i understand what he's trying to say to take your of the middle class first, but as far as i'm concerned, you know, 39.6%, you know, is more than reasonable. i think after they've had almost 12 years of tax breaks and 300% growth in the last 30 years in the upper 1%, i think they ought to be paying maybe 40%. >> host: pau
Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11